AROD never winning a WS was an argument I used to debunk the fact that individual player talent shouldn't be utilized when determining what division was the best....if you read the previous post you'd see that...where he stated the AL East was the best because it had AROD, Manny etc......this also made me think that the overall best SINGLE SEASON division (which I was trying to determine where the 2005 NL east stands) is contingent upon how those teams in that division actually faired in the playoffs and not individual talent.

And I disagree, I don't think one or two dominant teams makes the divsion dominant, it just means that division had the most dominant teams. I also think that the 2005 NL east has better team overall than the AL east....the Drays, Orioles, and B-jays have zero pitching this season. Great hitting but zero pitching....there records would agree with me.

blankman wrote:ARod's never won a WS....what does that have to do with anything at all? A ton of guys have never won a WS. Heck Barry Bonds or Albert Pujols has never won one...does that mean anything to this debate?

Record-wise they may be the best, but they sure as hell aren't even close to the best division in history. And yes, I think the AL East is better as a division as well. They may be top-heavy, but you don't need a ton of depth to be better (example, the '01 D-Backs who rode just Randy and Curt). I'd rather have the best of the best than a bunch of better than average teams.

They're easily one of the most balanced divisions in baseball history, I think every team is within 5 games of each other or something. Plus to be playing well over .500 for each team is definitely rare.

I will say that From 1 to 5, this is probably one of the best divisions ever. A lot of divisions are as good/better 1 to 4, a lot more are as good/better 1 to 3, etc., but there aren't many divisions that I know of that are as good all the way through.

dannyolbb wrote:Certainly there must be a computer program that can help with this argument. Obviously, it can't be proof (there won't be an absolute proof in this argument), but it could help.

Then again, maybe it's just wishful thinking.

There is a mathematical equation that was used originally for evaluating starting rotations, but an adaptation of it can be used here, I think. Let me fiddle with numbers and see what I come up with.

...

Step 1- Take the division leader and multiply their win total by 1.5.
Step 2- Take the second place team and multiply their win total by 1.75.
Step 3- Take the third place team and multiply their win total by 2.
Step 4- Take the fourth place team and multiply their win total by 2.25.
Step 5- Take the fifth place team and multiply their win total by 2.5.

Step 6- Take the totals of each division and divide by the amount of teams in the division. This takes care of the difference in teams between the AL West, NL Central, and the rest of the league. Those two divisions have a few adjustments made to their ratings, so they're on par with the rest of the league.

Doing the math now. I'm going to project every team's W-L over 162 games, assuming their WP% stays the same....

...

AL East Score - 160.2
AL Central Score - 158.6
AL West Score - 156

NL East Score - 172.8
NL Central Score - 160.2
NL West Score - 142.2

That took a half hour out of my day. It's clear by that ranking that the NL East is the strongest of the divisions and the NL West is the worst. Later (If I have time) I'll compare them to some historic divisions.

Interesting from a statistical standpoint....it'd be interesting also to see historically how it stands. However you'd probably have to wait until the end of the season....since more games played equals more wins. Nice!

DK wrote:

dannyolbb wrote:Certainly there must be a computer program that can help with this argument. Obviously, it can't be proof (there won't be an absolute proof in this argument), but it could help.

Then again, maybe it's just wishful thinking.

There is a mathematical equation that was used originally for evaluating starting rotations, but an adaptation of it can be used here, I think. Let me fiddle with numbers and see what I come up with.

...

Step 1- Take the division leader and multiply their win total by 1.5.Step 2- Take the second place team and multiply their win total by 1.75.Step 3- Take the third place team and multiply their win total by 2.Step 4- Take the fourth place team and multiply their win total by 2.25.Step 5- Take the fifth place team and multiply their win total by 2.5.

Step 6- Take the totals of each division and divide by the amount of teams in the division. This takes care of the difference in teams between the AL West, NL Central, and the rest of the league. Those two divisions have a few adjustments made to their ratings, so they're on par with the rest of the league.

Doing the math now. I'm going to project every team's W-L over 162 games, assuming their WP% stays the same....

...

AL East Score - 160.2AL Central Score - 158.6AL West Score - 156

NL East Score - 172.8NL Central Score - 160.2NL West Score - 142.2

That took a half hour out of my day. It's clear by that ranking that the NL East is the strongest of the divisions and the NL West is the worst. Later (If I have time) I'll compare them to some historic divisions.

Philliebuster wrote:Interesting from a statistical standpoint....it'd be interesting also to see historically how it stands. However you'd probably have to wait until the end of the season....since more games played equals more wins. Nice!

That's why I projected every team's wins over 162 games. For instance, if their winning percentages stayed the same, the NL East would look like this:

Atlanta 92-70
Philadelphia 87-75
New York/Washington/Florida 85-77

Those are the numbers I used, rather than the current standings (since some teams have played more games than others).

Not even close to the best in history. It is a very well balanced division, but if you want the most balanced division ever you would have to start with the 1991 AL West. All 7 teams who finished .500 or better. Plus there wasn't a "balanced" schedule back then where the teams just basically beat up on each other.